Primary Navigation

Phil's opinion of micro vs. long micro

There s never a final word on our emotional perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would

Message 1 of 18
, Apr 1, 2011

0 Attachment

There's never a final word on our emotional perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would say...

So i'd like to ask what Phil might have felt in comparing his work on micro and long micro. Was the first a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro an improvement in significant ways without significant trade-off's?

And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of the long micro with a navigator cabin? Those extra four feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.

All the Best,

Stefan

"One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of one's hand." -anonymous

> And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of the long micro with a navigator cabin?

I did some pencil work trying to scheme out a navigator cabin for the
Long Micro a few years back, and the problem that I uncovered in that
process was that the Micro Navigator has the rudder post located above
the rudder, and this reaches fairly sensible into the cabin. The Long
Micro's rudder post is located too far aft for a simple way to be
operated from inside the Navigator cabin.

Myles J. Swift

Phil commented that Micro is not the boat most people want but is the boat most people need. MylesJ

Message 3 of 18
, Apr 1, 2011

0 Attachment

Phil commented that Micro is not the boat most people want but is the boat most people need.

MylesJ

Stefano

... Don t know about this but... ... speaking of subjectiveness: I think Micro is 100% SMART with a look that says: 4 x8 plywood sheets and still looking

Message 4 of 18
, Apr 1, 2011

0 Attachment

>Was the first a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro an improvement in significant ways without significant trade-off's?

Don't know about this but...

>Those extra four feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.

speaking of subjectiveness: I think Micro is 100% SMART with a look that says: "4'x8' plywood sheets" and still looking cute;
Long Micro is an ELEGANT small sailboat that happens to have square sections.
As you said:
de gvstibvs non dispvtandvm est.

Ste

loyseal1

Ten years ago when I lived in New Orleans, I wrote Bolger a letter asking his opinion of the two boats. He closed the his reply with, Long Micro is a powerful

Message 5 of 18
, Apr 1, 2011

0 Attachment

Ten years ago when I lived in New Orleans, I wrote Bolger a letter asking his opinion of the two boats. He closed the his reply with, "Long Micro is a powerful sailor." He indicated that he thought the Long Micro was a better value (my wording)for the time and money invested. I am out of town right now. When I get home, I will post the entire letter for everyone's enjoyment. I am very proud of my letter and proudly display it in my study.

--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Topolski <public@...> wrote:
>
> There's never a final word on our emotional perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would say...
>
> So i'd like to ask what Phil might have felt in comparing his work on micro and long micro. Was the first a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro an improvement in significant ways without significant trade-off's?
>
> And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of the long micro with a navigator cabin? Those extra four feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.
>
> All the Best,
> Stefan
>
> "One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of one's hand." -anonymous
>
> http://www.cottagemed.org
>

Finally got back home after watching the Texas Rangers beat the Red Sox on opening day. Here is the letter from Bolger. Dear Mr. Seal, Plans of Long Micro, our

Message 7 of 18
, Apr 3, 2011

0 Attachment

Finally got back home after watching the Texas Rangers beat the Red Sox on opening day. Here is the letter from Bolger.

Dear Mr. Seal,
Plans of Long Micro, our Design #486, are available for $200 to build one boat; of Micro Design #422, $150.

Costs and time vary so wildly, that it useless to give figures, according to builder's habits and circumstances. Long Micro is about 50 % heavier than Micro, 532 lbs. of ballast to 412 , for instance. That would be a fair reflection of relative material cost. The difference in labor time would be much less as all the operations are the same.

In our opinion, and what we hear from owners, Long Micro is the better value for the investment in money and effort. They are powerful good sailers.

Sincerely,
Phil Bolger

So there it is, a direct comparison of the two, directly from Bolger.

--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "loyseal1" <loyseal1@...> wrote:
>
> Ten years ago when I lived in New Orleans, I wrote Bolger a letter asking his opinion of the two boats. He closed the his reply with, "Long Micro is a powerful sailor." He indicated that he thought the Long Micro was a better value (my wording)for the time and money invested. I am out of town right now. When I get home, I will post the entire letter for everyone's enjoyment. I am very proud of my letter and proudly display it in my study.
>
> --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Topolski <public@> wrote:
> >
> > There's never a final word on our emotional perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would say...
> >
> > So i'd like to ask what Phil might have felt in comparing his work on micro and long micro. Was the first a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro an improvement in significant ways without significant trade-off's?
> >
> > And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of the long micro with a navigator cabin? Those extra four feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.
> >
> > All the Best,
> > Stefan
> >
> > "One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of one's hand." -anonymous
> >
> > http://www.cottagemed.org
> >
>

Douglas Pollard

MR. Bolger in commenting on my wanting my boat 30ft instead of the 28ft as we originally talked about, said Of course we all know bigger is always better .

Message 8 of 18
, Apr 3, 2011

0 Attachment

MR. Bolger in commenting on my wanting my boat 30ft instead of the
28ft as we originally talked about, said "Of course we all know
bigger is always better". This of course was in the context of
the boat were were talking about certainly not any or every boat.
Doug

On 04/03/2011 01:40 PM, loyseal1 wrote:

Finally got back home after watching the Texas Rangers
beat the Red Sox on opening day. Here is the letter from
Bolger.

Dear Mr. Seal,
Plans of Long Micro, our Design #486, are available for
$200 to build one boat; of Micro Design #422, $150.

Costs and time vary so wildly, that it useless to give
figures, according to builder's habits and circumstances.
Long Micro is about 50 % heavier than Micro, 532 lbs. of
ballast to 412 , for instance. That would be a fair
reflection of relative material cost. The difference in
labor time would be much less as all the operations are
the same.

In our opinion, and what we hear from owners, Long Micro
is the better value for the investment in money and
effort. They are powerful good sailers.

Sincerely,
Phil Bolger

So there it is, a direct comparison of the two, directly
from Bolger.

--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com,
"loyseal1" <loyseal1@...> wrote:
>
> Ten years ago when I lived in New Orleans, I wrote
Bolger a letter asking his opinion of the two boats. He
closed the his reply with, "Long Micro is a powerful
sailor." He indicated that he thought the Long Micro was a
better value (my wording)for the time and money invested.
I am out of town right now. When I get home, I will post
the entire letter for everyone's enjoyment. I am very
proud of my letter and proudly display it in my study.
>
> --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com,
Stefan Topolski <public@> wrote:
> >
> > There's never a final word on our emotional
perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit
of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would
say...
> >
> > So i'd like to ask what Phil might have felt in
comparing his work on micro and long micro. Was the first
a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a
lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro
an improvement in significant ways without significant
trade-off's?
> >
> > And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of
the long micro with a navigator cabin? Those extra four
feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as
the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.
> >
> > All the Best,
> > Stefan
> >
> > "One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of
one's hand." -anonymous
> >
> > http://www.cottagemed.org
> >
>

Stefan Topolski

As I had felt, the photos show that she livens up a bit and looks a little cuter with something on top to break up the long straight lines, á la Red Zinger

Message 9 of 18
, Apr 5, 2011

0 Attachment

As I had felt, the photos show that she livens up a bit and looks a little cuter with something on top to break up the long straight lines, á la Red Zinger and others.

Richard Zapf's photos of Red Zinger seem a lot like a longer and centerboard version of Phil's later sharpie work. Still with a sharper curved entry like Dovekie but flat and full amidships.

I'm not sure that the finer curved entry up front makes a difference, and Richard wrote that it was a real bear to try and build those curves in.

All the Best,

Stefan

"One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of one's hand." -anonymous

MR. Bolger in commenting on my wanting my boat 30ft instead of the
28ft as we originally talked about, said "Of course we all know
bigger is always better". This of course was in the context of
the boat were were talking about certainly not any or every boat.
Doug

On 04/03/2011 01:40 PM, loyseal1 wrote:

Finally got back home after watching the Texas Rangers
beat the Red Sox on opening day. Here is the letter from
Bolger.

Dear Mr. Seal,
Plans of Long Micro, our Design #486, are available for
$200 to build one boat; of Micro Design #422, $150.

Costs and time vary so wildly, that it useless to give
figures, according to builder's habits and circumstances.
Long Micro is about 50 % heavier than Micro, 532 lbs. of
ballast to 412 , for instance. That would be a fair
reflection of relative material cost. The difference in
labor time would be much less as all the operations are
the same.

In our opinion, and what we hear from owners, Long Micro
is the better value for the investment in money and
effort. They are powerful good sailers.

Sincerely,
Phil Bolger

So there it is, a direct comparison of the two, directly
from Bolger.

--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com,
"loyseal1" <loyseal1@...> wrote:
>
> Ten years ago when I lived in New Orleans, I wrote
Bolger a letter asking his opinion of the two boats. He
closed the his reply with, "Long Micro is a powerful
sailor." He indicated that he thought the Long Micro was a
better value (my wording)for the time and money invested.
I am out of town right now. When I get home, I will post
the entire letter for everyone's enjoyment. I am very
proud of my letter and proudly display it in my study.
>
> --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com,
Stefan Topolski <public@> wrote:
> >
> > There's never a final word on our emotional
perseverations on this and that boat design, or a wee bit
of not harmful ancestor worship in asking what Phil would
say...
> >
> > So i'd like to ask what Phil might have felt in
comparing his work on micro and long micro. Was the first
a more ideal work from first principles and the latter a
lesser modification and compromise? Or was the long micro
an improvement in significant ways without significant
trade-off's?
> >
> > And has anyone completed drawings or mock ups of
the long micro with a navigator cabin? Those extra four
feet of waterline just don't look as cute or beautiful as
the smaller micro to my completely subjective eye.
> >
> > All the Best,
> > Stefan
> >
> > "One gathers peace as a feather in the palm of
one's hand." -anonymous
> >
> > http://www.cottagemed.org
> >
>

Mark Albanese

This atmospheric photo is taken from Dan Hookham s The Simplistic Sailboat, A Family Cruise in a $600 boat, his tale of building, then cruising the San Juan

Message 10 of 18
, Apr 6, 2011

0 Attachment

This atmospheric photo is taken from Dan Hookham's The Simplistic Sailboat, A Family Cruise in a $600 boat, his tale of building, then cruising the San Juan and Gulf Islands with wife and infant daughter in a self-adapted Birdwatcher.

The book is now oop. Too bad. There are several fine pictures of the boat. It's an earnest plea for living simply and a helpful cruising guide.

Mark

Mark Albanese

For the tow weight challenged LM lover, here s the Zeiger s old Zoon, which apparently was sailed without fatality. http://www.akzeigers.com/DaveAnke.html

oop? Out Of Print? oops. How long, how far did they cruise? Somewhat removed from the original ideas of relaxed sailing simplicity is it not, with lots more

Message 12 of 18
, Apr 10, 2011

0 Attachment

oop? Out Of Print? oops. How long, how far did they cruise? Somewhat removed from the original ideas of relaxed sailing simplicity is it not, with lots more strings 'n things to attend to? On that sort of water though she was probably a cheap, comfy, dry, roomy, and child-safe cruising choice. Good on 'em!

I suppose from the looks that they got the middle and leeboards ideas from Whalewatcher? And chopped off the transom square to mount the outboard motor off the side there - differently to what others have done further forward? And kept the oarports? Looks like a big change in rudder foil profile and chord. Is that a boomkin for a mizzen too? And what... a junk main sail?

There was once a Nacy Jack... open boat, but similar hull IIRC... how would a Birdwatcher do at that size? Cut back on the transparent panelling to lower cost...

>
>
> This atmospheric photo is taken from Dan Hookham's The Simplistic
> Sailboat, A Family Cruise in a $600 boat, his tale of building, then
> cruising the San Juan and Gulf Islands with wife and infant daughter
> in a self-adapted Birdwatcher.
>
> The book is now oop. Too bad. There are several fine pictures of the
> boat. It's an earnest plea for living simply and a helpful cruising
> guide.
> Mark
>
> ï¿¼
>

Mark Albanese

New 004.tif here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/files/Swallow/ Publication date is 1998. I was still able to get a new condition copy recently. They went

Publication date is 1998. I was still able to get a new condition copy recently.

They went far an wide in the PNW across several years in this boat, starting from their home in Belliingham, Washington. Base is a huge home built multichine houseboat called Homeboat. His design philosophy went like

" Phil Bolger designed a boat called Birdwatcher which looks similar to Swallow and was the inspiration for Swallow. Several people have recognized Birdwatcher in Swallow, but they usually have a comment such as, "I didn't know Birdwatcher was so big." Well, I didn't know she was so big either, and I still don't know, not having seen the plans. I am the kind of person who can't let boat designers do their job. I have to change everything because I think I have a better idea. When considering Swallow's design, I believe we made many right choices. No doubt Birdwatcher sail and rows better than Swallow, but Swallow is bigger and carries more gear.

She's got small, triangular transoms bow and stern. Most significant difference apart from the rig is the one man cockpit in the stern, all on on the same LOA. Must be somewhat beamier. Flat tarp main'sl, later converted to Junk. Oars, yes. He got a motor later, to make life simpler the other way 'round, but rowing was a big part of the fun.

The trouble with these boats for a singlehander might be that, cockpit or no, one needs the family or a big pile of stores further forward to be in proper trim.

Maybe you could pay for the extra size of Nancy Jack in acx plywood over the plastic! Note Dan's solution to that! Nice privacy.

On Apr 10, 2011, at 4:50 PM, c.ruzer wrote:

oop? Out Of Print? oops. How long, how far did they cruise? Somewhat removed from the original ideas of relaxed sailing simplicity is it not, with lots more strings 'n things to attend to? On that sort of water though she was probably a cheap, comfy, dry, roomy, and child-safe cruising choice. Good on 'em!

I suppose from the looks that they got the middle and leeboards ideas from Whalewatcher? And chopped off the transom square to mount the outboard motor off the side there - differently to what others have done further forward? And kept the oarports? Looks like a big change in rudder foil profile and chord. Is that a boomkin for a mizzen too? And what... a junk main sail?

There was once a Nacy Jack... open boat, but similar hull IIRC... how would a Birdwatcher do at that size? Cut back on the transparent panelling to lower cost...

How'd their leeboards go? Much weatherhelm?

Thanks for sharing the $600 Boat photo scan.

Mark Albanese

Then again, regarding BW trim this picture shows it may not be so critical. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3329/3581038080_c5d6601b93_o.jpg

When loaded over the drawn 1500lbs displacement waterlines shown there s a note says to trim with the bow about about 2 clear of still water. Extra loading,

Message 15 of 18
, Apr 10, 2011

0 Attachment

When loaded over the drawn 1500lbs displacement waterlines shown there's a note says to trim with the bow about about 2" clear of still water. Extra loading, and BW2 is built several hundred pounds heavier, would top out at how much?

BW2 particulars put a trailer weight of 800 - 1000 pounds, an added 200, and draft, Still not much, presumably on the same 1500 pound max. Double enders

Message 16 of 18
, Apr 11, 2011

0 Attachment

BW2 particulars put a trailer weight of 800 - 1000 pounds, an added 200, and draft, "Still not much," presumably on the same 1500 pound max.

Double enders take overloading by the stern more gracefully. Not so is still better. That picture shows the boat almost exactly level.

On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:36 PM, c.ruzer wrote:

When loaded over the drawn 1500lbs displacement waterlines shown there's a note says to trim with the bow about about 2" clear of still water. Extra loading, and BW2 is built several hundred pounds heavier, would top out at how much?

A quick BW hull model through Hulls, starting from 800, 1000, and 1500 pounds shows a pounds per inch immersion of about 350#.

Message 17 of 18
, Apr 11, 2011

0 Attachment

A quick BW hull model through Hulls, starting from 800, 1000, and
1500 pounds shows a pounds per inch immersion of about 350#.

On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:36 PM, c.ruzer wrote:
> When loaded over the drawn 1500lbs displacement waterlines shown
> there's a note says to trim with the bow about about 2" clear of
> still water. Extra loading, and BW2 is built several hundred pounds
> heavier, would top out at how much?
>

c.ruzer

So you could increase the load carried by 100% and only sink two and a bit inches as BW1 weighs 600-700lbs empty? There s an issue with the extra loading

Message 18 of 18
, Apr 12, 2011

0 Attachment

So you could increase the load carried by 100% and only sink two and a bit inches as BW1 weighs 600-700lbs empty? There's an issue with the extra loading possibly raising the COG height from being close to the floor though... external ballast then? External ballast takes the boat in a different direction, perhaps to do some offshore twitching too. Spring brings out the birds.

Twitchers,

"...I named Birdwatcher -- after reading an article by Jack Dunn in which he used that word for "craft in which one might poke through a marsh or backwater in search of nothing more than a pleasant lunch and a tan." (BWAOM, p234)

--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, Mark Albanese <marka97203@...> wrote:
>
> A quick BW hull model through Hulls, starting from 800, 1000, and
> 1500 pounds shows a pounds per inch immersion of about 350#.
>
> On Apr 10, 2011, at 9:36 PM, c.ruzer wrote:
> > When loaded over the drawn 1500lbs displacement waterlines shown
> > there's a note says to trim with the bow about about 2" clear of
> > still water. Extra loading, and BW2 is built several hundred
> > pounds heavier, would top out at how much?

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.